Engstrom

[PlayerRep]

I believe the perceptions got bigger after O'Day/Pflu were fired.

The firings did at least two negative things. They validated incorrect perceptions that there were huge problems within the football team, that the sexual assault gang allegations were real, and that the problems came from lack of discipline and tolerance by the coach/AD and need to win at all costs. They expanded the local and attention on the various issues/problems and got the issues/problems into the national mainstream press.

This is not to indicate that there have not been too many off-field issues with football, starting in 2007, including too many dui citations.

However, if you sort through the matters/incidents and categorize them after the actual facts and results became known, and look objectively at what remains, things look much different and better. Still too much, but not nearly as serious.

Wilson's matter was self-defense and he was acquitted. That shouldn't be held against UM. The gang rape allegations appear not to have been valid, based upon what is publicly known at this time. The taser incident involved misconduct by the police, and ended with a nolo plea to disorderly conduct (and it was never assault against the police, as incorrectly put out initially by police spokesmen). Even the supposed felony assault by the 3 frosh turned out to be over-charged, and remaining charges were reduced to misdemeanors when the facts/testimony didn't support felony-level assault charges. And, had the Missoulian press coverage not put all of these things on the front page in literally scores of articles, there would have been a better information and perspective communicated, and perceptions would not have become so grossly beyond reality. The main DOJ investigation would probably not have occurred.

 

[mcg]

The problem is that the way Mr. O'day and Mr. Pflugrad were terminated was orchestrated in a way to minimize any post termination legal liability. As a result many 'stakeholders' don't understand why two guys who they like and respect were s**t-canned. Engstrom has never said "here is why I'm hiring a new coach and AD", thus there is no way to understand whether it was a good idea or not.

I'd be more than willing to listen to RE's reasoning and consider it, but he's never offered any. I think this is unfortunate.

 

[AZGrizFan]

The problem is that the way Mr. O'day and Mr. Pflugrad were terminated was orchestrated in a way to minimize any post termination legal liability. As a result many 'stakeholders' don't understand why two guys who they like and respect were s**t-canned. Engstrom has never said "here is why I'm hiring a new coach and AD", thus there is no way to understand whether it was a good idea or not.

I'd be more than willing to listen to RE's reasoning and consider it, but he's never offered any. I think this is unfortunate.

If you're going to continue to be so logical and reasoned, you're going to have to leave. There's no room for that here amidst the witch hunts and stake burnings.... :lol:

 

[tourist]

Hangings. 19 of them, plus two dogs. One 'witch' was pressed to death with large stones. We are talking Salem here, not Missoula, yet. :mrgreen:

 

[Ursa Major]

I believe the perceptions got bigger after O'Day/Pflu were fired.

+1

 

[PlayerRep]

The problem is that the way Mr. O'day and Mr. Pflugrad were terminated was orchestrated in a way to minimize any post termination legal liability. As a result many 'stakeholders' don't understand why two guys who they like and respect were s**t-canned. Engstrom has never said "here is why I'm hiring a new coach and AD", thus there is no way to understand whether it was a good idea or not.

I'd be more than willing to listen to RE's reasoning and consider it, but he's never offered any. I think this is unfortunate.

I agree completely--and I said from the outset that Engstrom needed to speak up in order to alleviate the problem that has developed and you have identified. That doesn't mean that Engstrom should bad-mouth the guys and get a defamation claim from them.

However, if you look, listen, and talk to people in and close to the program, you will find that there is little or nothing, in terms of facts and issues, that is not already known, or generally known, that would justify firing. No smoking guns. What is not known is exactly what Engstrom's reasons were and what he was thinking he was going to accomplish. I believe Enstrom fired them only for big picture reasons, one of which he stated to them and stated again in a recent interview. He wanted a change of leadership. Whether that was a good idea, or justified, or back-fired on him, is another matter. People have speculated that he may have wanted to deflect attention from himself. I suppose he may have wanted to make a big statement, i.e. that things had to change, and he was starting at the top. This is similar to the change of leadership reason. Again, note that this may have back-fired on him, and escalated problems and created more problems.

What has become fairly clear is that Engstrom did not seek proper input and counsel, and listened to a number of the wrong people, and he did not consult a number of the people that he would normally consult. I've also heard people who know Engstrom, say that they think he thought the firings would blow over in a week or so, and that he under-estimated the impact of the firings. In addition to the firestorm of criticism for the firings, only some of which has subsided, he appears not to have understood the financial cost of the firings, didn't analyze the impact on fund-raising, didn't realize the firings would escalate the issues into the national mainstream press, and didn't have a plan for continuing to run the athletic department and football program. He made a good selection naming Delaney as the interim coach. He's caused alot of retirements, some of which I suppose will be good, and others probably won't. Alot of expertise and knowledge has to be replaced in a big hurry, and I don't think that's possible.

Now we'll see what is done with the apparently ongoing university student code matter, the AD hiring, the football coach hiring and timing, etc. We'll also see what his real support for athletics is. He's said some general positive things, but I wonder if he really believes that or is just trying to smooth over some of the problems he's created. He apparently backed off of his earlier commitment to have the university match funds donated for athletic-building projects, which is what he said he was do when he become president. I wonder if the athletic department is going to get stuck with paying the cost for the two firings. I assume it will.

Obviously, Engstrom has alot of other things on his plate at this time too. Tough job and place to be now. Not enough senior staff in place to do it.

 

[AZGrizFan]

He's caused alot of retirements, some of which I suppose will be good, and others probably won't. Alot of expertise and knowledge has to be replaced in a big hurry, and I don't think that's possible.

I agree with much of what you posted....conversely, with the "retirements", a lot of the "good-ol-boy" mentality and the groupthink hopefully has gone along with it. Expertise like THAT you don't need...

 

[PlayerRep]

He's caused alot of retirements, some of which I suppose will be good, and others probably won't. Alot of expertise and knowledge has to be replaced in a big hurry, and I don't think that's possible.

I agree with much of what you posted....conversely, with the "retirements", a lot of the "good-ol-boy" mentality and the groupthink hopefully has gone along with it. Expertise like THAT you don't need...

Maybe. However, the people who are leaving are long-time employees, didn't necessarily know each other that well, and were fairly different people. I don't see this group as either good-ol-boy or groupthink. The Dean, the head of the health center (still around as a doc), the general counsel, the vp-finance, and Foley. Perhaps others too. Some of these guys are retiring because of all the BS and stress, and probably weren't pushed out.